YOGESWARAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the accused, challenging the conviction and sentence imposed upon them, vide Judgment dtd. 22/12/2022 in S.C.No.93 of 2018, on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court / Additional Special Judge for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Coimbatore.

(2.) (a) The case of the prosecution is that the first appellant/A1/husband of the victim had married the de-facto complainant's daughter/victim on 19/5/2016, pursuant to a love affair; that the second appellant/mother of the first appellant/mother-in-law of the victim had committed cruelty in various ways; that thereafter, the victim and the first appellant set up a separate matrimonial home; that two weeks before the occurrence since the first appellant had to work on night shifts, he had dropped the victim in the house of P.W.1/mother of the victim; that the second appellant is said to have questioned the victim as to how she could go to her mother's house instead of coming to the appellants' house; that on 19/10/2016, the victim had called P.W.1 over phone and had stated that the appellants demanded a sum of Rs.5,00,000.00 (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) as dowry and if she was unable to bring the said amount, she could go and die and thereafter, the victim girl committed suicide and thus, the appellants committed the offences under Ss. 498(A) and 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Mr.B.Mohan, the learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the prosecution had not established that the appellants had demanded dowry or committed cruelty in connection with dowry demand or committed cruelty of such a nature which would drive the victim to commit suicide; that P.W.1 had given contrary versions in her complaint and in her deposition before the Court as to what happened prior to the occurrence; that P.W.1 had not stated about any alleged dowry demand of Rs.5,00,000.00 (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) in the complaint; that the said allegation is an afterthought; that it is an admitted fact that the first appellant and the victim girl got married after a love affair and considering the contradictions in the evidence adduced on the side of the prosecution, prayed for setting aside the impugned Judgment.